Eric Schmitt Leads Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing On Sanctuary Cities

[0:00] Subcommittee on the Constitution to order. Thank you all for being here. Today's topic is protecting American citizenship to [0:06] federalism sanctuary cities in the rule of law this topic is [0:10] Unfortunately timely as Americans have been inundated in recent weeks with stories of fellow Americans [0:17] Victimized by criminal illegal aliens who've been shielded by these sanctuary [0:22] jurisdictions, I'll start with [0:24] My opening statement and then my friend and ranking member Welsh will give his opening remarks [0:32] So their corner and we'll have remarks and then Senator Durbin's here [0:35] He will is after that and we'll swear buddy in and go down the line [0:38] There are moments when a policy debate stops being a policy debate when all the abstractions fall away [0:46] When all the buzzwords and talking points and legal jargon fall away [0:50] And what we're left with is a very simple question about the first duty of government sanctuary policies force this question [0:58] Because this is not really about federalism. It's not really about local control and it certainly isn't about compassion [1:04] It's about who comes first the American citizen or the illegal alien and sanctuary jurisdictions have answered that question [1:13] They've answered it with their laws. They've answered it with their policies. They've answered it with their conduct [1:18] They put the illegal alien first [1:20] That is what a sanctuary policy means in the real world [1:25] An illegal alien commits a crime and gets arrested by local law enforcement that arrest tells government [1:32] Exactly where the person is [1:35] Federal immigration authorities then make a very simple request [1:38] Let us know when this person is being released so that we can take him into custody and begin the removal proceedings [1:45] That is not some extraordinary burden. That is not a constitutional crisis. That is not [1:51] Conscription that is basic cooperation [1:54] It's the kind of coordination that happens every single day between state local and federal law enforcement in every other context and yet when the [2:04] Subject is immigration [2:05] Sanctuary jurisdictions refuse they withhold the information they block the transfer [2:11] They release the alien and then they send the alien back into the community [2:15] That is a choice a very deliberate choice and it's a choice that gets people hurt [2:21] Sometimes it gets people killed the defenders of these policies always want to keep this debate at a level of theory [2:28] They want to talk about values and discretion and trust and constitutional structure. They never want to talk about the consequences [2:36] but the [2:37] Consequences are the story the consequences look like Lake and Riley [2:42] murdered by an illegal alien who had already had encounters with law enforcement and was still turned loose in a system that puts [2:49] ideology ahead of public safety the consequences look like [2:54] Stephanie Minter an American mother whose killer was shielded by Fairfax Fairfax County's sanctuary policies [3:01] The consequences look like [3:04] Sheridan Gorman an 18 year old college student in Chicago [3:08] Shot in the back while walking with friends by an illegal alien who had already been caught at the border released [3:17] Arrested again then released again [3:19] They look like Katie Abraham a young woman in Illinois killed by an illegal immigrant drunk driver who had already been deported once [3:29] Re-entered the country and evaded the laws. Thanks to same sanctuary policies. These are not freak accidents [3:36] They're not acts of God. There are foreseeable consequences [3:40] of public officials making a conscious decision to obstruct immigration [3:45] Enforcement in release people who should never have been released back onto the streets in the first place [3:50] And then after it happens the same people who made those choices hide behind the language of principle [3:58] Let's be honest about that the anti commanders doctrine is not a suicide pact [4:03] It does not require local officials officials to sabotage federal law enforcement [4:09] It does not require them to conceal release dates [4:12] It does not require them to dump removable criminal aliens back into the [4:16] public and pretend their hands were tied. This is not constitutional fidelity. This [4:22] is political evasion. It is taking a theory meant to protect the balance of [4:28] our system and using it to cover for lawlessness because that's what [4:33] sanctuary policy really is. Lawlessness dressed up as principle. It says federal [4:39] immigration law can be ignored. It says cooperation is optional. It says the [4:43] safety of the American people comes second to an ideological project. And [4:47] that brings us back to the question at the center of this hearing. Who [4:52] comes first? The American citizen trying to raise a family, go to school, walk home [4:58] safely, and live in peace? Or the illegal alien who has no right to be here and in [5:04] many of these cases has already shown he's a danger to the public? Sanctuary [5:09] policies answer that very question every single time. Every time they refuse to [5:13] notify ICE. Every time they refuse to honor a [5:16] determination. [5:16] Every time they release a removable criminal alien instead of coordinating a [5:21] transfer. Every time they treat immigration law as some optional [5:25] suggestion instead of the law of the United States of America. And every [5:30] single time their answer is the same. The illegal alien comes first. Not Lake and [5:35] Riley. Not Stephanie Minter. Not Sheridan Gorman. Not Katie Abraham. The illegal [5:41] alien. Mr. Abraham said it plainly in his op-ed, [5:45] my daughter Katie was killed by a man who should never have been here. [5:50] And he was right. Policies that predictably create victims are not moral [5:56] no matter how compassionately the politicians describe them. An empty chair [6:03] remains at the family's table. More empty chairs will appear at more family tables [6:08] unless we end this madness. I understand that it is uncomfortable for some of my [6:14] friends on the other side to confront the reality that their sanctuary policies [6:18] and open-border ideology are producing preventable crimes against American citizens. But we [6:26] must confront it. Sanctuary policies are getting American citizens killed. The [6:31] American people know it and deep down Democrats know it. The path forward is [6:35] not complicated. It does not require new theories or sweeping innovations. It [6:40] requires nothing more than restoring the most basic principle of government that [6:45] American citizens come first. State and local governments should cooperate with [6:48] federal immigration enforcement. Allow federal government to do its job. Deport [6:53] criminal illegal aliens. Prioritize the safety of American citizens [6:57] over the demands of a radical ideology. That is not extreme. That is common sense. [7:01] At its core, this hearing turns on a simple question. When the choice is [7:07] presented, alert federal immigration authorities and protect the community or [7:12] release the illegal alien. Who comes first? The American citizens should come [7:16] first every single time. Lakin Riley, Stephanie Mentor, Sheridan [7:20] Gorman, Katie Abraham. They should come first. The American people have already [7:25] answered that question. It's time for Congress to insist on the same. [7:29] I'll turn it over now to Senator Welch. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman. I want to [7:34] thank the witnesses and we've got tremendous witnesses here today on this [7:38] incredibly important topic. I do agree with you that public safety is [7:42] absolutely essential and comes first and it's the first obligation of government. [7:46] We've got some law enforcement people who are here and are going to be [7:51] testifying about the so-called sanctuary city policy and how it weighs in. You [7:56] know the assertion here is that the [7:59] state and local law enforcement should be assisting in the immigration policy [8:04] of the president led by Stephen Miller and that includes right now an approach [8:10] towards mass roundups. That assertion is wrong. Our local law enforcement agencies [8:17] have an extraordinary responsibility to protect the citizens in the communities [8:23] they serve. They are not there to be an adjunct to implement a policy of [8:30] the president particularly as to mass deportation. We are in a situation here [8:36] where we've made real progress. The border is secure and Mr. Chairman don't [8:41] tell the president I said this but he deserves some credit for that. We're [8:44] going to keep that on the down-low. We also agreed that we should be deporting [8:49] violent criminals. That's there. Where we are having a dispute is the policy [8:58] implemented by ICE of mass deportation. [9:01] We have the right and we have the right to do it and we must keep it. We must [9:05] do it. We must do it. We have to have a [9:07] communication basis that enables us to [9:10] keep going from mass deportation to [9:11] high school deportation and roundups. [9:14] Number one it's claimed that we're going [9:17] after the worst of the worst but only [9:19] 14% of immigration arrests are for [9:21] violent criminals. instead in order to [9:24] meet what have been quotas demanded by [9:27] Mr. Miller immigration agencies are [9:29] raiding farms and factories, schools and hospitals. [9:31] own citizens. And our communities around the country are reeling from the harm of that, which [9:37] is, from my point of view, what we saw in Minneapolis, a rampage. The Department of [9:42] Homeland Security has really caused a lot of incredible harm, avoidable harm in our communities. [9:50] So our law enforcement agencies, including in Vermont, we had an incident last week, [9:56] or two weeks ago, where the ICE agents from Boston came to Vermont to arrest a person. [10:05] They did not notify local law enforcement. They didn't even notify Vermont ICE. And then got into [10:15] a confrontation where local law enforcement really had to keep the peace. And there was [10:21] literally no communication or cooperation from ICE. And our law enforcement [10:27] folks were shocked at the lack of communication, which is such an essential component of how our [10:33] law enforcement agencies work together to keep the peace. And of course, we saw it in Minneapolis. [10:40] And one of the police chiefs in Minneapolis, or the police chief in Minneapolis said, [10:45] we cannot let people in our communities think that our local law enforcement leadership is okay [10:50] with actions that are not only wrong, but illegal. So Mr. President, there's a question here. [10:57] Local [10:58] law enforcement has an obligation for local public safety. Their job is not to be an adjunct to ICE. [11:07] That's not their job. And it's particularly difficult when we have an ICE that time and time [11:13] again has overreached, has exceeded its authority, has acted in a way that demonstrates the lack of [11:21] training. And a lot of us have been insisting that ICE have the same training and same [11:27] obligation to be an adjunct to ICE. And I think that's a very important point. And I think that's [11:28] a very important point. And I think that's a very important point. And I think that's [11:29] a very important point. And I think that's a very important point. And I think that's [11:29] a very important point. And I think that's a very important point. And I think that's [11:30] a very important point. And I think that's a very important point. And I think that's [11:30] a very important point. And I think that's a very important point. And I think that's [11:31] a very important point. And I think that's a very important point. And I think that's [11:31] a very important point. And I think that's a very important point. And I think that's [11:32] a very important point. And I think that's a very important point. And I think that's [11:32] a very important point. And I think that's a very important point. And I think that's [11:33] a very important point. And I think that's a very important point. And I think that's [11:33] has. [11:34] It's a hard job, law enforcement. [11:37] It takes aggression, it takes restraint, it takes judgment, it takes an immense amount [11:43] of emotional self-control, and we're all totally devoted to the people who protect us. [11:50] But it's the job of the local law enforcement to protect the citizens in their communities. [11:55] And it is not just an abstraction, Mr. Chairman. [12:00] As Justice Scalia and Justice Alito indicated, the Tenth Amendment guarantees that the federal [12:06] government cannot force state and local governments to assist in enforcing federal law. [12:11] And this is about protecting the right of local communities to protect local communities. [12:19] Our state and local law enforcement people have a strong and a very valid interest in [12:24] directing their own personnel and resources towards the issues their communities care [12:28] about most. [12:30] Thank you. [12:30] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [12:31] I look forward to this hearing. [12:33] Thank you, Senator. [12:34] Senator Cornyn. [12:35] Thank you, Chairman Schmidt, for allowing me the opportunity to make a brief opening [12:38] statement. [12:40] Just this past weekend, once again, we heard about another illegal alien in the sanctuary [12:45] city of Chicago, Jose Medina Medina, killing an innocent Loyola College student, Sheridan [12:51] Gorman. [12:53] No parent should ever have to go through what her family has had to go through or what Mr. [12:59] Abraham's family has had to go through. [13:03] But what's even more devastating is the fact that Mr. Abraham's family has had to go through. [13:04] What's devastating is the attitude of everybody from the governor on down that they have no [13:11] responsibility whatsoever to deal with public safety threats. [13:16] They seem deaf to the cries of many angel families who have needlessly lost children [13:21] and loved ones. [13:24] Joe Abraham's daughter, Katie, was killed last year in Illinois after an illegal alien [13:29] drunk driver caused a hit-and-run accident that took her life. [13:33] And what did the leaders of Illinois, like the governor and others, have to go through? [13:34] I don't know. [13:35] I don't know. [13:36] Theoghts partners have to say to Mr. Abraham and his family? [13:43] Nothing. [13:47] Sadly, Katie Abraham's death and Sheridan Gorman's death likely could've been separated [13:51] if sanctuary cities and states like Chicago, Illinois would cooperate with ICE. [13:57] Now, it's an interesting argument that local law enforcement bears no responsibility to [14:03] help assist in the public safety mission when it involves federal authorities. [14:10] There's no law or that requires that. [14:14] . . . in fact. . . . . our brave men and women of all types. . . . . . our brave men and women of all types. [14:16] So it's unfortunate to hear it. [14:16] men and women who wear the uniform of local and state law enforcement are dedicated to [14:23] public safety. [14:25] But how they can stand by because the politicians in those jurisdictions simply say you cannot [14:30] assist federal law enforcement is something that I will never understand. [14:37] We hear story after story of innocent individuals who are being harmed by criminal aliens who [14:41] have been released back into the community by sanctuary jurisdictions. [14:46] And many times, often, these criminals offend over and over again. [14:54] So who do these sanctuary policies protect? [14:56] Certainly not U.S. citizens, not the local communities where they reside or they happen [15:03] to commit their offenses, or even aliens who followed the law and came to the United States [15:10] legally. [15:12] In fact, many of the victims of the crimes committed by illegal aliens are people in [15:19] our minority communities. [15:23] The reality is that sanctuary. [15:24] Policies only protect the wrongdoers, the criminals. [15:29] According to a recent Harvard-Harris poll, 75 percent of the American people support [15:34] deporting people who are not legally authorized to stay here in the United States, and particularly [15:40] criminal aliens. [15:42] So why is it so difficult for our Democratic colleagues to stand with the American people? [15:48] Again, 75 percent in polls say they support the deporting of people who shouldn't be here [15:53] in the first place. [15:55] Why is it that our Democratic colleagues find it so hard? [15:57] Why is it so hard to simply support enforcement of a law that Congress has passed? [16:05] Perhaps it's because they're too beholden to radical, progressive members of their political [16:10] base, or perhaps they just can't shake Trump derangement syndrome. [16:17] Look at the Lake and Riley Act, the first bill that was passed out of the Senate and [16:21] was signed into law by President Trump. [16:23] Even though the act clearly targeted some of the worst of the worst criminal aliens, [16:28] including those who assault law enforcement officers or cause serious harm to their lives, [16:29] the act clearly targeted some of the worst of the worst criminal aliens, including those [16:30] who assault law enforcement officers or cause serious harm to their lives. [16:31] The act clearly targeted some of the worst criminal aliens, including those who assault [16:32] law enforcement officers or cause serious harm to their lives. [16:33] The act clearly targeted some of the worst criminal aliens, including those who assault [16:34] law enforcement officers or cause serious bodily harm or death to another individual. [16:36] 33 Democrats and two Independents voted against that legislation. [16:44] As border czar Tom Holman has stated time and time again ICE and Customs and Border [16:48] Protection would never need to go into the communities like they did in Minneapolis where [16:53] the two tragic deaths occurred of individuals who determined that they wanted to interfere [17:00] with a law enforcement operation. [17:02] That would never occur. [17:04] That's what I know. [17:05] communities would cooperate with ICE, honor their detainers, and to see individuals safely [17:12] removed from the country and out of local jails. [17:17] Taking custody of a criminal alien at jail is far, far safer and better than putting [17:23] our law enforcement and the community at large at risk. [17:27] Instead of trying to defund ICE, which now our Democratic colleagues are in the process [17:32] of doing once again by refusing to fund the Department of Homeland Security, including [17:38] ICE, instead of trying to defund ICE, we need to fully fund ICE. [17:48] Or here's a concept. [17:51] Legislators need to legislate. [17:53] If we don't like the way that the laws are being enforced by our dedicated law enforcement [17:58] officials, it's the policies we promulgated and passed into law. [18:02] And those laws can be amended if there's sufficient justification for it. [18:08] But in this instance, we're not doing that. [18:08] There is none. [18:11] These laws need to be enforced. [18:13] ICE and the Department of Homeland Security need to be fully funded in order to perform [18:17] their critical missions, including identifying, detaining, and removing criminal aliens and [18:23] terrorists — yes, even terrorists — from the country. [18:27] Finally, I'd note, according to a list of sanctuary jurisdictions put out by the Department [18:33] of Justice last year, there are only 11 states and the District of Columbia that are considered [18:39] sanctuary jurisdictions. [18:41] And not surprisingly, most of them are run by Democrat governors or mayors. [18:46] There is no good reason for these states to be out of step with what most Americans support, [18:52] which is immigration enforcement, particularly when it comes to criminal aliens. [18:58] We should also not be funneling any federal dollars to any state or any locality that [19:05] continue to protect criminal aliens over American citizens and other law-abiding immigrants [19:10] as well. [19:12] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [19:13] Thank you, Senator. [19:14] Senator Durbin. [19:17] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [19:20] Last week, a few miles from my place in Chicago, Sheridan Gorman, an 18-year-old student at [19:28] Loyola University, was tragically murdered. [19:32] My heart goes out to her family, friends, and faculty and students at Loyola who are [19:37] literally grieving this loss of Sheridan today. [19:40] Jose Medina, a Venezuelan national who arrived in the United States in 2023, has been charged [19:47] with her murder. [19:49] Medina was arrested in 2023. [19:51] He did not appear for his hearing, so a bench warrant was issued for his arrest. [20:00] This information was available to the federal government, but Medina was not detained by [20:05] ICE during the Biden administration or the Trump administration. [20:10] This committee is the right place to have a serious, bipartisan conversation about how [20:15] to prevent further tragedies like this. [20:19] I'm sorry that the Department of Homeland Security and some Republican members of this [20:23] committee have decided this is going to be a political issue. [20:24] I'm sorry that the Department of Homeland Security and some Republican members of this committee [20:25] have decided this is going to be a political issue. [20:26] I'm sorry that the Department of Homeland Security and some Republican members of this committee [20:28] have decided this is going to be a political issue. [20:29] Our broken immigration system is in desperate need of bipartisan reform. [20:34] We need order at our border. [20:36] I've said this repeatedly and I'll say it again. [20:39] We should never knowingly allow a dangerous person to come into this country. [20:45] If someone is in this country seeking citizenship or legal status and commits a serious crime, [20:50] they should be deported immediately. [20:53] Let's start there. [20:54] Is that a good bipartisan start? [20:55] I hope so. [20:57] I hope so. [20:58] Let's start there. [21:10] What does the record show for his ICE efforts to date? [21:12] Six out of the seven people who have been detained, arrested, some deported, were not [21:19] violent criminals at all. [21:21] They had virtually no criminal record. [21:24] Frankly, they were in a situation where there was no reason to stop them. [21:28] Six out of seven. [21:30] So much for the accuracy of ICE's efforts. [21:32] Yeah. [21:32] The reality is that neither the Democrat or Republican administrations have delivered [21:38] on promises made. [21:40] And President Trump's reckless mass deportation campaign has not made us safer. [21:47] Congress needs to step up and do our job, fix our broken immigration system. [21:53] Some of the speeches you've already heard in this room were given by individuals who [21:56] had a chance to vote for bipartisan, comprehensive immigration reform and voted no. [22:03] For years, I've worked on a bipartisan basis. [22:05] There were eight of us, 12 years ago, led by Senator John McCain, Chuck Schumer, myself, [22:12] Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, some familiar names. [22:16] We worked for months to put together a comprehensive plan, and we prepared it and submitted it [22:23] in 2013 to the Congress. [22:25] What did it do, this bipartisan plan? [22:28] It secured our border with more resources than ever so that dangerous individuals couldn't [22:34] enter our country. [22:36] It required strict vetting. [22:37] And tracking of all legal immigrants when they entered. [22:41] Now, listen to this. [22:43] It required all undocumented immigrants to register with the government and pass a background [22:48] check. [22:49] Those who posed any threat would be subject to deportation. [22:54] Others would pay a fine and taxes, go to the back of the line behind legal immigrants, [22:58] and work towards citizenship over time. [23:02] That bill passed the United States Senate with over 60 votes. [23:07] Unfortunately, the Republican House of Representatives refused to even consider it. [23:09] I'm sorry. [23:10] They didn't bring it up for a debate or discussion. [23:15] We need to try again. [23:17] We can continue to have these hearings and end up with nothing other than political rhetoric. [23:22] Sadly, even our best efforts on a bipartisan basis won't bring back the victims, like Sheridan. [23:31] But we can honor their memory by absolutely working together in a good faith effort to [23:36] prevent the tragedies like this in the future. [23:39] I'm ready to try again. [23:40] Mr. Chairman, may I respond briefly? [23:43] You weren't here once. [23:44] I was here in 2013 when this bill was on the floor, and I was. [23:49] And so he could only be referring to me. [23:52] So I'm a little sick and tired of hearing our colleagues talk about a failed piece of [23:57] legislation as somehow a panacea. [23:59] I bet that's cold comfort to Mr. Abraham and other families who've lost loved ones, because [24:06] criminal aliens are here in the United States, thanks to four years of Biden open border [24:10] policies, and are preying on innocent American citizens. [24:15] And our colleagues say, well, we should have passed a bipartisan immigration law back [24:19] in 2013, while at the same time they refused to fund immigration enforcement. [24:25] We should now. [24:26] It's just too much. [24:27] OK. [24:28] We're going to swear on the witnesses. [24:29] It is the tradition of this committee to swear on all the witnesses who testified before. [24:32] Would you please stand and raise your right hand? [24:33] I swear that the testimony you're about to give to this committee is the truth, the whole [24:37] truth, and nothing but the truth. [24:38] So help you God. [24:39] Thank you. [24:40] OK. [24:41] I will introduce the majority of witnesses. [24:42] You're going to introduce the minority? [24:48] Yes. [24:49] Yeah. [24:50] OK. [24:51] First up is Mr. Graham. [24:52] Mr. Graham. [24:53] Thank you. [24:54] My name is Jason Meares. [24:55] I know him well. [24:56] He served as the 48th Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia from 2022 to [25:02] 2026. [25:03] He's now a partner at Torridon Law. [25:07] Under his leadership, Virginia recorded a 30% reduction in murders and double-digit [25:11] decline in overall violent crime, coinciding with the launch of a public safety strategy [25:16] targeting repeat violent offenders and directing resources to affected communities. [25:21] He's a proud husband. [25:23] He's a father of three. [25:24] We welcome him to the committee. [25:25] Jessica Vaughn is the Director of Policy Studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, where [25:31] she has worked since 1992. [25:32] She's an expert on immigration policy and operations, including visa programs, immigration [25:37] benefits, and immigration enforcement and public safety. [25:39] Vaughn has testified before Congress dozens of times, including both before the U.S. House [25:44] of Representatives and the Senate. [25:45] Before joining the center, she was a Foreign Service Officer with the State Department. [25:52] She has a master's degree from Georgetown University and a bachelor's degree from Washington [25:57] College in Maryland. [25:59] Mr. Abraham, who's here, Joe Abraham, is a lifelong Illinois resident, husband and father [26:03] of three, a corporate finance professional at a Fortune 50 company. [26:08] He's dedicated his life to his family and his community. [26:11] Joe is the father of Katie, who was killed by a drunk-driving illegal alien in January [26:15] of 2025. [26:17] Since her death, he has spoken on national media, including Fox News, and published multiple [26:22] articles on his family. [26:23] We have some good news for you in the Middle East, Joe. [26:24] You could get away with an office-spreader job on Facebook and LinkedIn, but we're [26:26] curious to hear what you have to say about those stories. [26:28] Joe, please go ahead. [26:29] Paul, are you here to say a few words for the city's residents? [26:30] Or is that just me? [26:31] I mean, they're such a good idea. [26:32] Ms. I'm in Toronto and I'm doing all the work. [26:33] I live in the big cities in the property. [26:34] So, I would tell them that you must stay back and take care of your family. [26:35] They would be happy to. [26:36] But you're going to do so much for the city's residents and their families. [26:37] So, I'm going to ask you to speak up, and that's why I'm here today. [26:38] Mr. William, you are the best person in the State Department. [26:39] and he got a modest 86% of the vote. [26:42] Better than you. [26:44] He's pretty good, I've got to say. [26:46] But he started out as a new deputy sheriff in one county. [26:53] He has been spectacular in his career. [26:56] He was the leader of law enforcement at Duke University, [27:00] and now he is the elected sheriff of Durham County [27:04] and has incredible experience in what it takes to do good law enforcement, [27:08] what it takes to cooperate with other agencies, including federal agencies, [27:12] and we're delighted, Sheriff, to have you here. [27:15] And we also have Stephen Vladeck, who's a well-known and frequent witness here, [27:23] Professor Georgetown University Law Center, [27:27] where he's recognized for his expertise on federal courts, the Supreme Court, national security, [27:34] and the author of a best-selling book, The Shadow Docket [27:37] and How the Supreme Court. [27:38] The Supreme Court uses stealth rulings to amass power and undermine the republic. [27:43] I also really respect that he's just a beloved teacher. [27:47] He pays attention to his students, and he's won many awards, which I won't go through, [27:54] but I want to express to you my gratitude that you're here again on your time. [27:59] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. [28:01] Thank you, and we'll recognize now the witnesses for their opening statement. [28:03] We'll go left to right. [28:04] We'll start with you, Jason. [28:05] Senator, I have trouble operating heavy equipment, [28:17] so I apologize for that. [28:20] Thank you. [28:22] Stephanie was 41 years old, a mother from Fredericksburg, Virginia. [28:27] Her family described her as a beam of light in dark places, [28:30] and on February 23rd of this year, Stephanie was standing at a bus stop in Fairfax County, [28:35] where she was stabbed to death. [28:36] Her killer had been arrested more than 30 times, and he was in this country illegally. [28:41] A federal judge had ordered his final removal six years ago. [28:45] An ice attainer was lodged, and Fairfax County refused to honor it. [28:50] The police warned the prosecutor in writing repeatedly that this man was a ticking time bomb, [28:56] a menace, and would kill someone. [28:58] The police were right. [28:59] Stephanie Minter did not have to die, and that is why I'm here today. [29:04] But I need this committee to understand something critical. [29:07] Stephanie Minter is not an isolated tragedy. [29:10] She is tragically the most recent and visible name in a documented pattern of preventable harm to Virginians, [29:15] a pattern with a common cause, sanctuary policies. [29:19] In December, [29:20] of 2025, [29:21] a Fairfax County man was shot and killed in his own home one day after an illegal immigrant with seven prior charges, [29:28] including a prior murder charge, was released from jail. [29:31] The ice attainer was refused, the charges were dropped, he was free, and a man was dead. [29:37] The victim could have been spared with one simple phone call from Fairfax authorities to ICE. [29:43] As shocking as this sounds, it is that simple. [29:46] A quick phone call would have saved this man's life. [29:49] A woman was raped on a popular walking trail in Herndon, Virginia, [29:53] days after an illegal alien was released from jail early by a prosecutor, [29:58] who had already reduced his felony assault charge without ever consulting police. [30:02] A four-year-old girl was nearly abducted in the middle of the night by an illegal immigrant, [30:06] who broke into her bedroom. [30:08] The prosecutor progressively dismantled the charges over 18 months, [30:13] down to a misdemeanor, and then dropped them entirely when a judge rejected a plea deal as inadequate. [30:18] A child, [30:19] a child predator was released early, an illegal immigrant, [30:22] and offered Roblox gaming currency to children under the ages of 10 [30:27] who had already been arrested for public sexual misconduct. [30:30] This all happened in the same county, with the same sheriff, [30:34] and the same prosecutor, and the same policy over and over again. [30:38] And that is just a few miles away from here. [30:41] Members of this committee, this is not incompetence or coincidence. [30:46] This is policy. [30:47] Fairfax County Commonwealth's Attorney, [30:49] Steve Discano, published this policy on his own website. [30:52] And it says, quote, [30:54] whenever possible, Steve will make charging and plea decisions [30:58] that limit or avoid immigration consequences. [31:01] This is a formal written policy giving criminal illegal immigrants preferential treatment [31:07] in our justice system. [31:09] It's not discretion, it's discrimination. [31:12] Discrimination against American citizens in favor of those who are here illegally, [31:17] who then commit crimes. [31:18] Because a citizen, [31:19] with 30 plus arrests, [31:21] would not have gotten the same treatment as Stephanie Minter's killer did. [31:24] A citizen who broke into a child's bedroom [31:27] would not have had charges reduced to a misdemeanor. [31:30] The Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund has formally petitioned the Department of Justice [31:34] to open a civil rights investigation to Discano's office, [31:37] arguing this policy violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. [31:42] They are right. [31:43] Now let us be direct about the law. [31:45] Immigration is not a shared power with state and local and federal authorities. [31:49] It belongs exclusively to the federal government under Article I, Section 8. [31:54] Congress has the authority to establish a uniform rule of naturalization [31:58] and not what we're seeing today, which is a patchwork of local noncompliance. [32:03] What Fairfax County is doing is exactly the opposite of what our framers intended. [32:07] It's actually affirmative obstruction. [32:10] Fairfax County's police says, because of the direction from their board of supervisors, [32:15] their sheriff, and also from their prosecutor, that essentially you can release a man, [32:19] with 30 arrests and a federal removal order from your jail, rather than let ICE take them in. [32:25] This is not non-cooperation. [32:27] It is a choice to put violent criminals back on the street. [32:30] Now what works? [32:31] We saw what works because Virginia previously did it. [32:34] Under Governor Youngkin's Executive Order 47, he created a state immigration task force, [32:39] and within eight weeks, working together, 521 criminal illegal immigrants were arrested, [32:45] including 113 gang members, including the East Coast leader, [32:49] who was a member of MS-13, living in Prince William County, was captured. [32:53] We were referred to as the national model. [32:55] That has been taken away from us by Governor Spanberger, who has reversed Governor Youngkin's [33:00] common sense policies and actually has said, even if you're a convicted felon sitting in a Virginia [33:05] prison, you cannot cooperate with ICE and notify ICE authorities. [33:09] That is unconscionable. [33:11] I served as Virginia's Attorney General because I believe government's first and foremost [33:15] fundamental duty is to protect the people it governs. [33:18] Sanctuary policies, [33:19] catastrophic and willful failure of that duty. [33:22] Virginians are paying the price. [33:24] Stephanie Minter and her mother, Cheryl, are regrettable proof. [33:27] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [33:28] Thank you. [33:29] Mr. Birkhead. [33:30] Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Welch, and other distinguished members of the [33:37] Subcommittee on Constitution, thank you for this opportunity to testify. [33:41] My name is Clarence Birkhead, Sheriff of Durham County, North Carolina. [33:45] And I believe that true public safety is built on a foundation of trust between local law enforcement [33:51] and the communities they serve. [33:53] Throughout my career in public service, I have learned that for me to be successful [33:57] as a law enforcement officer, I needed to secure the trust and support of the community. [34:03] Recognizing the value of community trust and strong relationships, I have never wavered [34:08] from this focus to remain public focused and community oriented in my policing philosophy. [34:15] This is one reason I joined recently and became the co-chair of Law Enforcement Immigration [34:21] Task Force, a nationwide group of law enforcement leaders committed to [34:25] immigration reforms that enhance public safety and community trust. [34:29] In my experience as police chief and sheriff, I have found that leaders at local level know [34:35] their communities well and are focused on ensuring public safety. [34:39] Local law enforcement leaders are solely responsible for prioritizing enforcement [34:44] against threats in the public manner that builds trust and maintains community. [34:50] Given this, I believe that federalism principles are best upheld when local [34:55] jurisdictions are not impeded in the process. [34:57] In my opinion, when local law enforcement is perceived as an extension of federal immigration [35:00] authorities, the trust we all work to secure and maintain is eroded. [35:03] Effective policing is impossible without cooperation with the public. [35:08] In my opinion, when local law enforcement is perceived as an extension of federal immigration [35:12] authorities, the trust we all work to secure and maintain is eroded. [35:19] As a result, immigrant communities, both documented and undocumented, [35:24] are more likely to fear engagement with local law enforcement and retreat [35:28] into the shadows. [35:29] When individuals fear cooperation could lead to deportation, they are less likely to report [35:35] crimes or participate in investigations. [35:38] Victims of domestic violence hesitate to come forward. [35:41] Witnesses of violent crimes refuse to come forward and participate in investigations. [35:47] Law enforcement's ability to solve crimes is diminished, making all of our communities [35:53] less safe. [35:54] Our nation is facing longstanding and complex immigration issues that Congress and the [35:59] federal agencies have been trying to solve for decades. [36:03] Some policy makers have sought to mandate that state and local law enforcement take on [36:08] new immigration enforcement responsibilities. [36:11] However, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the federal government cannot [36:16] commandeer state and local officials to carry out federal regulatory programs. [36:22] Federalism requires the respect of local law enforcement functions. [36:28] The term sanctuary city is subject to judicial reform. [36:30] The term sanctuary city is subject to judicial reform. [36:30] The term sanctuary city is subject to judicial reform. [36:30] The term sanctuary city is subject to judicial reform. [36:30] The subject of this hearing has not been defined in federal legislation. [36:35] The absence of clarity over this term's meaning often obscures more than illuminates. [36:41] Durham County is not a sanctuary county. [36:44] We follow state and local law, including presenting detainers to state judicial officials for [36:50] review and following any related court orders issued. [36:54] If ordered by magistrates or judges to hold an individual for 48 hours, we do so. [37:00] We also notify ICE and give them the opportunity to seize that individual. [37:06] As required by state law, we notify ICE once again when the 48-hour clock starts. [37:12] As a law enforcement leader who must answer to voters, I prioritize local law enforcement [37:17] and public safety above all else. [37:19] I determine whether or not to participate in the voluntary 287 program or which federal [37:26] law enforcement task force my deputies are assigned to. [37:30] With the goal being to [37:31] advance community trust and public safety, this also means that I work to ensure that [37:37] the Durham County Sheriff's Office upholds core state and federal constitutional principles, [37:43] including ensuring individuals' rights, due process, and civil liberties are protected. [37:50] Border Czar Tom Holman laid out immigration enforcement priorities, identifying and deporting [37:55] known, undocumented violent offenders. [37:59] I agree with that approach. [38:00] I don't agree with targeting people [38:02] without criminal records who pose no threat to public safety. [38:07] Protecting American citizenship and the rule of law does not require us to turn our local [38:12] police officers or deputy sheriffs into immigration agents. [38:15] It requires us to respect the expertise and autonomy of sheriffs in our cities and jurisdictions [38:22] and let us serve as the professionals that we are. [38:26] We all want to identify and apprehend violent offenders, especially those committing violent [38:30] crimes, regardless of their immigration status. [38:34] In that spirit of respect, I urge this subcommittee to support policies that empower local law [38:39] enforcement to build bridges, not barriers. [38:42] I look forward to your questions. [38:43] Thank you. [38:44] Thank you, sir. [38:45] Ms. Fawn. [38:47] Good afternoon and thank you. [38:48] Again this week, we have witnessed a tragic consequence of sanctuary policies, this time [38:53] in Chicago, with the senseless killing of Sheridan Gorman by an illegal alien who apparently [38:58] made a beeline for Chicago, where he had protection from immigration enforcement, even after being [39:04] arrested within months. [39:05] In this sanctuary state, he also potentially had access to a driver's license, illegal [39:11] employment, and maybe even taxpayer-funded health care, nutrition assistance, and education. [39:18] More than half of all illegal aliens live in jurisdictions like Chicago, with policies [39:23] that deliberately hinder immigration enforcement and prohibit cooperation between state and [39:28] local law enforcement and ICE. [39:31] Not only do these policies often violate federal law, they impose significant human and human [39:35] protection and fiscal costs. [39:37] My organization has been tracking sanctuary policies since 2015, and we maintain a map [39:42] and list on our website. [39:44] The politicians and advocacy groups who promote sanctuary policies rely on false narratives [39:49] and misleading descriptions of immigration enforcement to justify them. [39:54] They claim that the federal government is trying to force local authorities to do the [39:58] work of ICE, when in reality, it is usually the local politicians that are prohibiting [40:05] law enforcement agencies from doing their job, which includes preventing crimes and [40:10] taking criminals off the streets, and if needed, communicating with fellow law enforcement [40:15] agencies to do that. [40:17] They claim that cooperation with ICE is a major distraction to local police, when actually [40:23] it just takes minutes to phone ICE or other communication, for example, about a deportable [40:29] inmate's release. [40:31] They claim that it drains local resources to cooperate with ICE, when in reality, it [40:35] costs just a few dollars to honor a detainer, according to sheriffs who know. [40:40] And generally speaking, enforcing immigration law is a bargain for taxpayers. [40:45] The average cost of a deportation, $17,000, is much less than the cost of allowing an [40:51] illegal alien to stay, which is about $65,000 over their lifetime, according to the National [40:57] Academy of Sciences. [41:00] They claim that sanctuary policies are needed to build trust with all immigrants, so they [41:04] feel comfortable reporting crimes. [41:06] In fact, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, immigrants, including illegal [41:12] immigrants, historically report crimes at the same or higher rates as Americans. [41:17] And the parts of the country where sanctuary jurisdictions are prevalent do not have higher [41:22] immigrant crime reporting rates than parts of the country where cooperation with ICE [41:26] is the norm. [41:28] The truth is that sanctuary policies are an irrational political response based on a disagreement [41:33] with federal immigration policy. [41:35] While the motivations are ideological and political, unfortunately, the costs of sanctuary [41:45] policies are very tangible. [41:48] From October 2022 to February 2025, jails in sanctuary jurisdictions declined more than [41:54] 26,000 detainers nationwide. [41:57] In just the first nine months of last year, jails in Chicago, where Sheridan Gorman was [42:02] killed, declined 329 ICE detainers or more. [42:04] The number of ICE detainers in the United States has declined more than 2,000 in the [42:05] United States. [42:06] The number of ICE detainers in the United States has declined more than 10,000, or more [42:07] than one a day. [42:08] Dozens of those released had serious prior convictions including assault, robbery, drugs, [42:14] weapons, sex assault on a minor, and even homicide. [42:17] This is not just a big city problem. [42:20] It happens in smaller jurisdictions, too. [42:22] For example, from 2024 through early 2025, until North Carolina passed a state anti-sanctuary [42:29] law, the Durham County Jail failed to honor 33 detainers. [42:34] These criminal aliens had pending charges. [42:35] In addition, the court of justice has made the second sentence. [42:36] including DUI, burglary, aggravated assault, weapons, [42:41] sexual assault, and even homicide. [42:43] There is no valid public safety reason not to cooperate [42:47] with ICE in these cases. [42:49] Sanctuary supporters are unmoved [42:51] by the pain their policies have caused American families [42:54] of victims, Americans like Sheridan Gorman, Stephanie Minter, [43:00] Katie Abraham, Denny McCann, Drew Rosenberg, Matthew Denise, [43:05] Dominic Durden, Lake and Riley, Kate Steinle, [43:08] Richard Ferguson, Jr., and so many others whose priceless lives [43:12] were lost as a result of sanctuary policies. [43:15] Congress must help by barring certain federal funding [43:18] and tax exemptions for sanctuaries and clarifying [43:22] that state and local police have the authority to cooperate [43:25] with ICE so they cannot be blocked from doing [43:28] so by state or local laws. [43:31] Finally, those who are seriously harmed as a result [43:34] of sanctuary policies, [43:35] should have some recourse in the courts, [43:38] which could be an effective deterrent to egregious policies. [43:41] Thank you. [43:43] Thank you. [43:43] Professor Vladeck. [43:45] Chairman Schmidt, Ranking Member Welch, [43:47] distinguished members of the subcommittee, [43:48] thank you for the invitation to testify today. [43:51] As Justice Kennedy put it in 1995, quote, [43:53] the framers split the atom of sovereignty, unquote. [43:57] The central premise of constitutional federalism was [43:59] that by dividing power, not just horizontally among the branches [44:02] of government, but vertically [44:04] between the federal government and the states, [44:06] it would be best secured against tyranny [44:09] and governmental lawlessness. [44:11] Indeed, one needn't look very far these days to see [44:13] that aspiration regularly being vindicated. [44:16] In my testimony this afternoon, [44:17] I'd like to underscore three long-settled principles derived [44:20] from this understanding. [44:22] First, as Justice Scalia wrote for the court in 1997, quote, [44:26] the federal government may neither issue directives [44:28] requiring the states to address particular problems, [44:31] nor command the state's officers or those [44:33] of their political subdivisions to administer [44:35] or enforce a federal regulatory program. [44:37] Such commands are fundamentally incompatible [44:41] with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty, unquote. [44:44] Were it otherwise, Congress could usurp not just state policy [44:47] choices, but the president's discretion [44:50] over federal law enforcement by compelling states [44:52] to do what the president won't. [44:54] I would have thought this principle would be especially [44:57] persuasive to those whose views of executive power are even [45:00] broader than mine, including some of the other witnesses [45:03] this afternoon and members of the subcommittee, alas. [45:06] Second. [45:07] The notion that the federal government cannot coerce [45:08] the states on questions of federal policy [45:10] is also reflected in the Supreme Court's Spending Clause [45:13] jurisprudence. [45:14] It is not, and Contra Attorney General Bondi never [45:17] has been, true that Congress's greater power to simply not [45:21] spend money implies a lesser power [45:23] to impose any and all conditions on whatever it spends. [45:27] Thus, the Supreme Court has struck down spending conditions [45:29] on the ground that they are not truly voluntary, [45:32] because at that point the federal government is [45:34] effectively dictating state policy, something it cannot [45:37] do under any guise, and no matter how compelling [45:39] the policy arguments might be. [45:41] To similar effect, even legitimate conditions [45:44] must be both substantially related to the purposes [45:47] for which Congress is spending the money [45:49] and clearly expressed in law. [45:51] In other words, even otherwise permissible spending conditions [45:53] must come from the clear language of statutes, [45:56] not the whims of an executive order. [45:58] Obviously, that should call into question [46:00] so many of this administration's actions [46:02] in withholding federal funds, virtually none of which [46:05] have been based on clear statute of limitations. [46:07] Again, I would have thought, given its mandate, [46:10] the subcommittee would be especially interested [46:12] in the latent unconstitutionality [46:15] of those executive actions. [46:16] Alas, third, unless these principles or my testimony [46:20] be taken out of context, neither the anti-commandeering doctrine [46:23] nor the limits on spending conditions allow states [46:26] to impede or obstruct federal law enforcement. [46:29] And I'm not aware of any state or local government [46:32] that has argued or actually acted otherwise. [46:35] But there is a constitutionally critical, [46:37] critical distinction between active obstruction [46:40] and passive noncooperation, one that courts [46:43] have regularly enforced, including [46:45] in the immigration context. [46:47] There may well be political points [46:48] to be scored in trying to collapse that distinction [46:51] and in trying to portray certain local and state choices [46:54] to not cooperate as affirmative interference [46:57] with federal law enforcement. [46:58] But if the goal of today's hearing [47:00] is to unpack what the Constitution actually [47:02] has to say about this distinction, [47:04] the reality is that the law on this front, [47:06] for better or for worse, [47:07] is particularly clear. [47:09] It is clear not only that a refusal [47:11] to cooperate with federal law enforcement [47:13] is not impermissible obstruction, [47:15] but that local and state officials' motives [47:17] for not cooperating with federal law enforcement [47:19] are, at least for constitutional purposes, [47:22] entirely irrelevant. [47:24] Whether one calls a noncooperating local [47:26] or state government a sanctuary jurisdiction or not, [47:29] the Constitution protects their choice all the same. [47:32] Immigration is, quite obviously, a matter [47:34] on which there are deep political and increasingly [47:37] partisan disagreements, many of which [47:39] have significant local and or regional variations. [47:43] Some localities might choose to cooperate [47:45] with federal immigration efforts. [47:47] Others might see such cooperation [47:48] as impeding the community relationships necessary [47:51] to identify and solve crimes or as threatening the liberty, [47:54] not just of those who are being targeted by these efforts, [47:58] but of those who aren't or at least shouldn't have been. [48:01] Ultimately, the choice as to how to devote law enforcement [48:04] resources, including whether or not to use such resources, [48:07] to aid in federal immigration efforts, [48:10] is one that has not just traditionally [48:12] been left to state and local authorities. [48:14] It's one that the Constitution commits to them. [48:17] Members of the subcommittee may have vehement disagreements [48:19] with the different choices that different local and state [48:21] governments have made in this space. [48:23] I have some disagreements with some of those choices myself. [48:26] But the animating principle and promise of federalism [48:29] is that states are allowed to have their own reasons [48:32] for making their own choices. [48:33] And for those who think those governments have [48:35] made the wrong choices, there are remedies. [48:38] I just respectfully submit that those remedies [48:40] lie at the local and state ballot boxes, [48:42] not in a Senate hearing room. [48:44] Thank you again for the invitation to testify today, [48:46] and I look forward to your questions. [48:48] Mr. Abraham. [48:50] Chairman Schmidt, ranking member, [48:53] members of the committee, every parent in this room [48:55] understands that there are moments in life that [48:58] split time in two, everything before and then everything [49:01] after. [49:02] For me, that moment came January 19, 2025. [49:06] Before that day, I was a father watching my children [49:08] grow into adulthood. [49:10] Enjoying [49:10] the simple privilege of seeing their lives unfold. [49:15] After that day, I became a father [49:17] who buried his 20-year-old daughter. [49:21] So before I begin, I want you to picture [49:23] something pretty ordinary. [49:25] A car sitting at a red light idle, five young friends [49:28] inside, talking, laughing, having a normal night. [49:33] My daughter Katie was in the back seat. [49:35] Car wasn't moving. [49:36] It was at a red light. [49:38] In a single instant, my daughter's life was gone. [49:41] An intoxicated, illegal immigrant [49:44] slammed into the back of her car [49:45] at 80 miles an hour. [49:47] They never saw that coming. [49:49] First responders fought to pull my daughter's dead body out [49:53] of that car. [49:55] She didn't survive. [49:58] The man who caused the crash, Julio Cucobol, [50:01] a Guatemalan national who had already been deported, [50:06] ran, but was eventually captured in Milford, Texas, [50:09] trying to escape the country. [50:12] Despite federal authorities knowing who he was, [50:15] he was able to re-enter the United States in 2022 [50:19] and live in Illinois under a false identity. [50:21] Because stinkers. [50:22] Because stinkers. [50:22] State policies and enforcement gaps [50:25] fail to protect the public. [50:28] Katie was a compassionate, funny, sharp-witted. [50:31] She had friends from many different backgrounds. [50:34] And she had a way of making everyone [50:36] feel seen, heard, and valued. [50:39] She was also a strong athlete, water polo, and swam [50:42] competitively through high school. [50:45] Katie deserved a future full of love, laughter, and life, [50:48] graduating college, building a career, falling in love, [50:52] and experiencing all the joys and heartbreak. [50:54] But what will the young woman do? [50:57] Well, guess what? [50:59] She is almost the only woman in the history ofure [51:05] who has been able to walk the foot of the road [51:08] and walk her way to theordinate of adulthood. [51:11] Instead, that was stolen at a red light [51:15] in a street in Illinois. [51:17] The man who killed her described himself in court [51:21] as unable to read or write English, even Spanish. [51:24] He spoke a Chi Mayan language from Guatemala. [51:27] Yet somehow, he possessed an Illinois driver's license, [51:29] take advantage of those conditions. That is not a complicated idea. That is human [51:35] behavior. It's predictable. And when those incentives exist, the consequences are [51:42] not abstract. Families like mine live with them forever. My parents immigrated [51:49] legally to the United States from a third world country. They came here for the [51:53] opportunity America offered to people who work hard, follow the law, and [51:57] contribute to society. My parents honored that opportunity and they raised us to [52:03] respect the law. But that trust was broken by the government sworn to [52:09] protect its citizens. Katie's death was not inevitable. It was preventable. That's [52:17] the question before this committee. Not whether crime exists in society. It [52:22] always has. Not whether citizens commit more crime than aliens. That's [52:30] a complete deflection and completely irrelevant to the types of these [52:34] situations. The question is whether policy decisions increase or decrease [52:39] preventable risk. Did failures enforcement matter? Did gaps in [52:46] coordination matter? Did policy choices create conditions that allowed this to [52:52] happen? Those questions deserve clear answers. Because intentions don't save [52:58] lives, results do. Katie's not a headline. She was not a statistic. She was someone [53:06] worth more than being ignored and made invisible, especially in my state. Just [53:12] because her story was inconvenient. She was my daughter. [53:20] She should be finishing school right now. She should be planning for her future. [53:24] She should still be laughing with her family and friends. Instead, her urn sits [53:31] in a room we constructed to remember her life. I can't bring Katie back, but this [53:41] committee has a power to examine what failed, to demand transparency, and to [53:47] ensure policies are judged not by their intentions, but by their outcomes. Every [53:54] preventable death deserves that level of seriousness. Katie received a [53:59] death sentence that night. We received a life sentence. I ask this committee to [54:03] ensure that what happened to my daughter is examined honestly and that meaningful [54:09] steps are taken so fewer families ever have to stand where I stand. Thank you. [54:14] Thank you, Mr. Abram. Mr. Meares, I want to start with you. As you mentioned in [54:25] your testimony, Governor Spanberger's, you know, issued executive order number one, [54:29] banning, affirmatively banning, the state police cooperation with federal [54:34] immigration authorities. I think after this incident, the Stephanie Mentor [54:36] incident, she hasn't even committed that if somehow this monster were to get out [54:39] or be released or something that they wouldn't even notify ICE. You're a former [54:44] prosecutor. You're a former Attorney General. Under 8 U.S.C. 1373, it makes it [54:52] unlawful for any state or local official to restrict information sharing with [54:56] federal immigration authorities. Do you believe or do you have an opinion as to [55:00] whether or not the governor issuing an order like this could be [55:04] breaking federal law? I mean, I personally think it does, but I think [55:09] what she has done is dismantled what, as I noted before, was a very successful [55:14] policies under Governor Youngk under under Executive Order 47, which was state [55:18] police and the Virginia Department Corrections, [55:20] cooperation with federal immigration authorities. To give you perspective, [55:25] Senator, if you are dealing with the Virginia Department of Corrections, [55:29] you're not picked up on a DUI, you're not picked up on petty larceny, you're a convicted felon, but not aations. hellen [55:36] serving time in penitent in prison period not jail prison and even then governor spanberger [55:44] thinks if you're a violent convicted felon sitting in a virginia prison [55:49] then not notify federal authorities and what is worse senator right now sitting on her desk is hb [55:57] 1441 out of richmond this bill would force force every locality in the entire state of virginia [56:05] 133 localities 95 counties 35 independent cities to adopt the same policy as fairfax county it would [56:14] be an absolute bar for them even if they want a locality wants to enter into 287g agreement [56:22] even then this bill on her desk with all expectations she's probably going to sign [56:27] it in the dead of night to appease her left-wing base would turn virginia [56:32] into not just 11 now sanctuary states virginia would be the 12th [56:36] it would be mandatory and so i think it is an example of what happens too often in government [56:42] where people ask citizens to judge them not by the results but by their intentions and too [56:48] many lives are being lost right now i was with cheryl minter yesterday and it broke my heart [56:54] to hear a private citizen so beside herself that as she asked me why do the politicians not get it [57:04] why don't they get it why are so many of them sitting back and saying my daughter [57:09] gets stabbed multiple times by somebody who had 30 not one not five not 10 not 15 not 25 30 prior [57:18] arrests and so you could see where the average citizen look at what's happening and they just [57:23] shake their head and then they see what's happening with not just in richmond obviously [57:28] in washington where they had those that have cheerleaded these sanctuary policies so i do think [57:33] it is um a violation of federal law i'm sure it'll be litigated but in my opinion it is senator thank [57:40] you uh ms vaughn i want to ask you briefly in my limited time here um your testimony uh urges [57:45] congress to penalize jurisdictions that obstruct enforcement one idea that um jumps out is i think [57:51] we might actually be able to pass in reconciliation is conditioning federal funding or sorry [57:56] conditioning federal municipal bond funding on a jurisdiction certifying that it's not a [58:02] sanctuary city how would that work in in like a minute um well um currently municipal bonds are tax [58:10] exempt um and um i think that the adoption of sanctuary policies especially those that are [58:17] i believe are many of them are operating in violation of federal law section 1373 and 1644 [58:26] that's a governance issue and it's it's affecting public safety and the um the fiscal standing of [58:35] these jurisdictions and it's important that investors be [58:40] informed about that and also that these municipalities that are in violation of federal [58:46] law not be able to be subsidized by taxpayers um when they have serious governance issues like this [58:54] thank you and it makes it more expensive for them to also to borrow money thank you um mr abraham [59:01] first of all thank you for being here um as i talked to you before here i cannot imagine [59:05] um the grief you and your family still have and the the loss [59:10] that you've suffered um and i appreciate your courage and being outspoken about this what [59:16] what message would you give to these politicians who defend sanctuary cities what are they missing [59:25] what are they what do they not understand about the impact that this has [59:29] um that you've lived what would you want to say yeah i don't well first i know they have [59:34] no consideration for that that's just my take from my own experience so that's one i wish they were [59:41] able to put themselves in someone else's position and look at what their policies are doing [59:47] you know this whole intention thing or the moral high ground that they all think they have [59:52] when they're doing it for really an immoral purpose does not make it moral does that make it [59:58] right you're going to tell me that four or five years ago you had everyone in the world bum rush [1:00:05] our border and that's okay now we're saying look we can't be extreme in what we're doing where were [1:00:11] these voices four years ago [1:00:12] this is way too extreme. And it didn't take legislation to stop what happened over those [1:00:19] years. So you want to get really down to the nitty gritty here. Anyone who came in during [1:00:25] the Biden regime ought to be looked at. Katie's killer was not the worst of the worst. That poor [1:00:32] girl in Chicago, he wasn't the worst of the worst. How did it become that way? It shouldn't just be [1:00:38] worst of the worst. So I'm sorry they missed that. Thank you. Senator Walsh. Thank you very much, [1:00:45] Mr. Abraham. I also want to thank you for coming and acknowledge your loss. Thank you. [1:00:52] Sheriff, there's some practical challenges here. There is a goal for public safety. We've had [1:01:00] tragedies that have to be attended to. There's also been tragedies that we saw in Minneapolis. [1:01:07] I'd like to get to a place where we have public safety for everyone. [1:01:13] What level of training do you're offering? [1:01:15] And how much do the officers have to go through before you're going to give them a badge and send [1:01:20] them out in the public with a weapon to protect the public? Thank you, Senator, for that question. [1:01:28] The Durham County Sheriff's Office, we run our own academies. And in North Carolina, [1:01:33] the basic law enforcement training academy is nearly 685, almost 700 hours of training. [1:01:41] At the Durham County Sheriff's Office, once they successfully complete that academy training, [1:01:47] we run a program. [1:01:47] We run a post academy for another 10 to 12 weeks to further ensure that our deputies are fully trained [1:01:54] and qualified to take the streets of Durham County. Training that includes de-escalation, [1:01:59] cultural sensitivity, CIT training, how to recognize a subject that's going through a mental [1:02:06] illness, and how to identify the resources that we need to get those individuals the help that [1:02:11] they need. And to make, obviously, clear and correct arrests and detentions. And to make sure that [1:02:17] those people are educated and the resources that they need, and that they can be trained to do that. [1:02:22] So that's a lot of training, I think. Thank you. And my understanding is, in your department, [1:02:27] as in most police departments, communication with other departments that may be affected is [1:02:31] incredibly important. What's been your experience about the communication that you get from ICE? [1:02:37] The communication with ICE, unfortunately, is next to none. I've actually reached out to ICE, [1:02:44] asked them to inform me when they need to look for someone or pick someone up in Durham County to know [1:02:47] what you do. And I've reached out to them a number of times, many in the city and many in the city. [1:02:48] avail and when they do come to my courthouse and they actually did this [1:02:52] and I appreciated it they told us who they were looking for the subject was [1:02:56] supposed to appear in court he did not appear and they left and we assisted [1:03:01] them in looking for that individual so that's the level of communication that I [1:03:05] would like to see every single time they identify someone that's in my [1:03:08] jurisdiction that needs to be apprehended thank you very much [1:03:12] professor Vladeck you know this question of conditions that are being [1:03:18] now imposed and the suggestion that that is a tool that the executive should use [1:03:23] I just want you to go over why not only you believe that's unconstitutional but [1:03:30] even from a policy standpoint it is very detrimental to the well-being of our [1:03:37] communities sure I mean the the unconstitutionality part is just that the [1:03:41] spending clause [1:03:43] is not a power that the president has it's a power that Congress has and so [1:03:46] when Congress in its wisdom sees fit to impose conditions upon recipients of [1:03:51] funds be they local or state governments be they private actors that's a [1:03:55] legislative choice the president cannot change the meaning of legislation [1:03:59] through an executive order and so insofar as the Supreme Court has said [1:04:02] over and over again during presidencies of both parties that spending conditions [1:04:07] must be clear that they must be clearly expressed in the law that they must be [1:04:12] voluntarily entered into law that they must be voluntarily entered into law and [1:04:13] that they must be voluntarily entered into by the recipients you can't clearly [1:04:15] express in law a condition that appears only in an executive order and so that's [1:04:19] the problem there senator to your policy point I mean I think the larger issue is [1:04:23] that spending conditions as the Supreme Court has said are supposed to give the [1:04:28] recipients a meaningful choice and part of that's to reflect that spending [1:04:33] conditions cannot be a backdoor around the ban on commandeering and so you know [1:04:38] when folks talk about proposals to for instance condition municipal bonds [1:04:43] tax exemption I don't know how much of a choice that is for local and state [1:04:47] governments with tight budgets I mean that's exactly why the Supreme Court in [1:04:50] the Affordable Care Act case in 2012 said the Medicaid expansion was [1:04:53] unconstitutional because the states even though they were getting such a good [1:04:57] deal from the federal government didn't really have a choice to say no so you [1:05:00] know again folks are gonna have myriad policy views about what the right [1:05:04] approach here is I think we've just lost sight of what the Constitution imposes [1:05:08] as a constraint so in this context and so the bottom line this legislative body [1:05:13] could impose conditions that would be in statute you'll be voted on by the [1:05:18] elected representatives of the house and the Senate yep as long as as long as four [1:05:22] things were true as long as the conditions were clearly expressed in law [1:05:25] as long as they were reasonably related to the underlying money that was being [1:05:30] spent as long as the state or the recipient voluntarily accepted them and [1:05:34] as long as they didn't otherwise offend the Constitution with those conditions [1:05:38] Congress can do it I will just say briefly and Senator I know you know this [1:05:41] we've heard reference to section 13. [1:05:43] 73 most of the courts to consider whether 1373 is unconstitutional have [1:05:48] said yes it is thank you I have to run and vote that's where a senator Schmidt [1:05:53] meant he'll be right back and I'll be right back and I'll turn it over to [1:05:58] Senator Kennedy thank you sheriff your sheriff of Durham County yes sir [1:06:14] yeah beautiful beautiful parish or we call our counties parishes beautiful [1:06:19] County is it at least part of your job as a [1:06:26] job to protect the public yes it is okay um you believe that vetting people at [1:06:39] the border is racist do you not I'm sorry you believe that vetting people at [1:06:48] the border is racist do you not no I've never said that I believe that having [1:06:54] secure borders is important and we need we have processes that allow individuals [1:06:59] to come into the country the right way absolutely you believe [1:07:04] that people should be able to violate federal immigration laws without consequences don't you [1:07:13] no sir I do not I believe that anyone who violates federal or state law needs to be held accountable [1:07:18] and there need to be consequences you don't believe in cooperating with ice do you I believe [1:07:25] in cooperating with federal authorities as I do a number of federal agencies I cooperate with and [1:07:30] I certainly would cooperate with ice if they would cooperate with me you were elected in [1:07:43] 2018 Sheriff is that right that's correct okay on April 18 2018 you gave an interview with a media [1:07:59] organization called Indy week do you remember that I'm familiar with the paper yes okay here's what [1:08:07] you said I'm quoting you your words not mine I disagree with the incumbent Sheriff's that's the [1:08:17] guy you beat with the incumbent Sheriff's cooperation with ice I will make a clear [1:08:24] and uncompromising commitment to not cooperate with ice a sheriff I will not honor ice detainers [1:08:34] and we will not participate in ice roundups end quote did I read that correctly yes sir okay um [1:08:46] in April of last year you uh you spoke to a group group of ice employees do you remember that not [1:09:04] particularly no [1:09:04] okay well there was an article in a media organization a media entity called the assembly [1:09:11] are you familiar with them do you remember I've heard of the assembly yes yeah do you remember [1:09:15] giving them an interview I I give several interviews I actually don't remember that [1:09:20] particular one but I'm okay well here's what you said in the interview apparently on the record [1:09:27] these ice uh employees that you spoke to you were referencing them and you said quote they these ice [1:09:39] rules asked me so Sheriff if someone is about to be released from your jail and the detainer is about [1:09:48] to expire you will call us and let us know what was my answer you said no because that's not what [1:10:00] the law says no I will not call ice in a quote did I read that correctly yes you did okay and [1:10:11] sir Senator that was before the new law which is now House Bill 318. [1:10:15] which requires me to make that second phone call prior to that it was it was not state law which I [1:10:21] follow and all my deputies follow sure so now we do make that second phone call but ice Ice agents [1:10:27] aren't notified whenever someone is entered into my process into my jail do you need some [1:10:32] water because I think your pants are on fire do you remember a gentleman by the name of Carlos [1:10:41] rubber Perto Mendoza Martinez not right officer okay Sheriff yes you are not right officer no God [1:10:48] Okay. [1:10:50] He was in our country illegally, for Mexico. [1:10:55] He was in a street gang. [1:11:00] Back in Mexico, he was convicted of manslaughter. [1:11:05] And he was in your jail. [1:11:08] And because in 2021 and 2024, [1:11:15] Mr. Martinez was arrested for assaulting a woman and domestic violence. [1:11:22] And I placed a detainer on this guy because he was in our country illegally. [1:11:28] And he was a criminal. [1:11:32] And he was in your jail. [1:11:35] And you wouldn't honor that detainer, would you? [1:11:38] I can't say that I did not honor the detainer. [1:11:40] I can. [1:11:41] I can say what I did honor was the conditions of the release that were issued by a judge. [1:11:46] And so, therefore, and once again, ICE was notified that they could come pick up this individual. [1:11:50] Do you really believe in public safety? [1:11:53] Yes, sir, I do. [1:11:53] You would allow someone in our country, illegally, convicted of manslaughter, [1:12:00] convicted of domestic violence, [1:12:04] in your jail, ICE says, please hold him when his time is up. [1:12:11] We want to get this criminal out of our country. [1:12:15] And you said no? [1:12:18] ICE was notified that they could come pick up the individual. [1:12:21] And for some reason, they did not. [1:12:23] And the judge issued the conditions of release. [1:12:25] I am a custodian. [1:12:27] I do not determine who is released or held. [1:12:29] I follow the court's order. [1:12:31] Sheriff, I don't mean any disrespect, but you ought to be ashamed. [1:12:35] How can you possibly be for public safety? [1:12:41] If you hate our immigration laws so much that you would have let a convicted murderer back on the street. [1:12:49] Do you really hate immigration laws that much? [1:12:53] Senator, it's not a matter of that I hate immigration law. [1:12:56] You could have fooled me, Sheriff. [1:12:59] Thank you, sir. [1:13:00] Yes, sir. [1:13:01] Thank you for your service. [1:13:05] You're now in charge. [1:13:06] I got to go vote. [1:13:09] Holly is in charge. [1:13:11] It's a dangerous moment. [1:13:12] Oh, all kinds of things could happen. [1:13:13] I think it's Senator Durbin, I believe. [1:13:16] Sheriff Birkhead, tell me a little bit about your background since you've been declaring. [1:13:19] You've been declared an enemy of public safety. [1:13:23] Well, I grew up in rural North Carolina, Randolph County to be exact, went to public schools there. [1:13:30] And I started my law enforcement career in Randolph County in 1984. [1:13:34] And then I matriculated to Durham, North Carolina, went to work for Duke University, served there for almost 17 and a half years. [1:13:43] And 10 years after going to work at Duke University, I was hired and appointed as the chief and director of public safety for both the [1:13:50] University and the Medical Center. [1:13:53] And from there, I after seven years, then I served as the chief of police in Hillsboro. [1:13:59] And now I am the sheriff in Durham County, elected in twenty eighteen. [1:14:03] Elected by the people. [1:14:04] Elected by the people. [1:14:06] What was your percentage? [1:14:08] This past primary election, I got eighty six point two percent of the votes. [1:14:12] Seems like the people who know you were prepared to vote for you. [1:14:15] That would be correct, sir. [1:14:16] Yes. [1:14:17] And so whatever has been said at this committee meeting may not. [1:14:21] Really reflect any knowledge of who you really are. [1:14:24] I listened to the chiefs of police responding to ISIS activities that led up to the killing of two innocent people in Minneapolis and others led up to the point where a young woman in Chicago driving to her church to donate some clothing was shot five times by the ICE agents and survived it by some miracle. [1:14:49] And then no charges were filed against her. [1:14:53] The chiefs of police in Minneapolis. [1:14:55] Minneapolis and Chicago report that because of ICE activities, they've got two obvious problems, one responding to reports of ICE activity and number two, the fact that the community, which is being beset by these ICE agents, is living in fear and doesn't reach out as they once did to law enforcement officials as a former chief of police in at least several jurisdictions. [1:15:21] Does that explanation ring true to you? [1:15:24] It does, sir. [1:15:24] Unfortunately, it does. [1:15:27] That would seem to be the. [1:15:28] Dilemma we face here as we turn up the law enforcement in communities and don't target specifically bad individuals. [1:15:37] We run the risk of scaring and frightening ordinary families and businesses. [1:15:42] As one person said to me, they're going after the gardeners, not the gangsters. [1:15:48] Do you see that as a problem? [1:15:49] I do indeed, sir. [1:15:51] And as I said in my opening testimony, I agree with going after the target individuals who are in this country, documented or undocumented. [1:16:00] And if they commit violent crime, and that's what we do in Durham County, where I'm the sheriff, I'm proud to serve the residents of Durham County as their sheriff. [1:16:09] Anyone who violates the law in my jurisdiction will be identified, apprehended and presented to the D.A. for hopefully successful prosecution. [1:16:18] And six out of seven of those who have been detained and some deported by the ICE operation had no criminal record of any substance. [1:16:31] Does that surprise you? [1:16:33] It disappoints me. [1:16:35] Again, I think we need to be going after those individuals who commit crimes in our cities and towns all across this country and not terrorizing communities and certainly not going after those who are trying to make a living and who are not violating our laws. [1:16:48] I have some pride of authorship in this comprehensive immigration bill, which passed the Senate in a bipartisan way, supported by business and labor and every major group there was, then founded in the U.S. House of Representatives. [1:17:04] But it had a provision that. [1:17:05] Every undocumented person in America who wants to work has to report themselves where they live to the federal government and go through a criminal background check that every employer has to use E-Verify to make sure of the identity of the person who is in their employment. [1:17:22] That seemed to me to be a pretty good system, changing what we live with today, but creating an opportunity for people to work legally in this country if they pass a criminal background check. [1:17:32] Does that sound reasonable to you? [1:17:34] It does sound reasonable to me. [1:17:37] Again, our immigration system has been broken for quite some time, and I think that would be a step in the right direction. [1:17:43] It's one of my major disappointments. [1:17:45] I introduced the DREAM Act over 20 years ago. [1:17:47] I still think it's basic justice to give people who are in this country as children, toddlers, and infants because of the decision of their parents. [1:17:56] You have a chance to become part of that country. [1:18:00] They get up every day in a classroom with the rest of the kids and swear allegiance to a flag, which doesn't allow them to have a chance. [1:18:08] I think there are ways that we can. [1:18:09] We can make America safer and humane, and it doesn't involve ICE agents shooting American citizens on the streets of Minneapolis or Chicago. [1:18:19] I think we can do this in a thoughtful and humane way if we temper the rhetoric and get down to basics. [1:18:24] Thank you very much for your testimony. [1:18:26] Thank you, sir. [1:18:27] Thank you, Senator. [1:18:28] Senator Whitehouse. [1:18:30] Thank you. [1:18:31] I come from Rhode Island, and as the sheriff has pointed out, sanctuary cities is not a legal term. [1:18:41] People can sort of define it however they. [1:18:43] Wish to. [1:18:46] I think all of the Republicans who've appeared during this committee have been lawyers. [1:18:50] So let me just say a word about the law in the First Circuit where my capital city, Providence, for instance, is located. [1:18:59] It is not lawful for a local law enforcement agency to detain someone for a minute, for an hour, for a day, just on an ICE detainer. [1:19:14] If somebody is arrested and held by the Providence police and the cause for which they're being held by the Providence police. [1:19:21] Evaporates the existence of an ICE detainer does not justify continuing to hold them. [1:19:26] In fact, continuing to hold them would justify a liability suit against the department and the officer for that, all of which is fun and games for ICE because ICE agents are subject to no civil liability, given how the Supreme Court has shrunk the Bivens doctrine down to a grain of sand. [1:19:55] But everybody else can be sued. [1:19:59] So to me, it's a little bit rich when people call my capital city a sanctuary city and demand that our police officers, our real law enforcement officers, put themselves in harm's way for civil liability when our courts have said that's actually against the law. [1:20:23] You can be liable for that. [1:20:26] The second thing that I'd note is that cooperation matters. [1:20:32] And as the sheriff has pointed out, cooperation is a two way street. [1:20:36] But even if cooperation is not a two way street. [1:20:39] There is something called de-confliction. [1:20:42] Sheriff, does the word de-confliction mean anything to you? [1:20:46] Yes, it does. [1:20:47] It's pretty standard law enforcement practice to de-conflict. [1:20:50] There's a model law on de-confliction. [1:20:53] It's an accreditation qualification. [1:20:56] There are courses taught on de-confliction, are there not? [1:20:59] Yes, sir, there are. [1:21:01] And what I've seen is that ICE refuses to de-conflict. [1:21:06] Not only that, Secretary Noem didn't even know the difference. [1:21:09] She didn't know what de-confliction was. [1:21:12] That's how unethical. [1:21:12] That's how unapparent to these agents, the basic principles of law enforcement are. [1:21:19] They don't know to de-conflict. [1:21:21] And then when they come in and do harm, and local law enforcement, sheriffs, attorneys general, local police departments have to investigate, let's say a killing, a homicide, they make the decision that they're not even going to cooperate. [1:21:38] They're not going to turn over any evidence. [1:21:40] They're going to hide the evidence that they have from local law enforcement. [1:21:43] And that's exactly what was done. [1:21:45] And that's exactly what was done in Minneapolis. [1:21:49] So again, it's a little bit rich to come in and say, well, the Providence police should do more to cooperate with these so-called law enforcement officials, these officers, when they refuse to de-conflict. [1:22:03] And if they shoot someone and there's a local homicide investigation, they hide the evidence rather than cooperate with local law enforcement. [1:22:14] So the last thing I'll just point out, I just want to tell this story to give everybody an idea. [1:22:19] Okay. [1:22:20] Let's talk about what this actually looks like in real time. [1:22:22] Luckily, nobody was hurt in this episode in Rhode Island. [1:22:25] ICE was operating in our Superior Court courthouse. [1:22:30] Contrary to a written agreement with the court that they would not operate in that courthouse. [1:22:38] They were taking pictures of people in the courthouse, contrary to a court rule that for very good and proper reasons forbids taking pictures of people in the courthouse. [1:22:49] They were pursuing somebody who they, who was over 30 years old. [1:22:52] They were pursuing somebody who they, who was over 30 years old. [1:22:53] They were pursuing somebody who they, who was over 30 years old. [1:22:54] And for some reason, they got it into their heads that a high school intern working for a state judge was that 30-year-old-plus person. [1:23:03] So they started pursuing the intern who went to the judge and said, I'd like to go back to school. [1:23:10] My time's up. [1:23:11] Can you give me a ride back to school? [1:23:13] So a sitting state judge walked his intern out to his car. [1:23:19] The ICE agents, who should not have been operating there in the first place, followed him out. [1:23:23] Here's something that law enforcement does. [1:23:26] It's called clues. [1:23:28] The man's car was in a parking spot reserved for judges. [1:23:35] So even if they hadn't bothered to figure out who the judges were in the courthouse in which they were improperly operating, they could have deduced with just a little bit of brain activity that perhaps the man getting into the car in the judges-only parking spot was a judge. [1:23:56] Instead, they insisted on trying to figure out who the judge was. [1:23:58] The judge was a man trying to seize the high school student, who they thought was over 30 years old, evidently. [1:24:04] And they told the judge, get out of the effing car, only they didn't restrain themselves to F. [1:24:11] I'm going to smash your effing windows in your car and drag you out if you don't. [1:24:16] This to a judge, who they just followed out of the courthouse. [1:24:25] And if for some reason they didn't know he was a judge, it does not take a lot of brain power to do the deduction from where the car was parked that this was a judge. [1:24:35] They operate. [1:24:36] Why would anyone in their right mind in law enforcement want to cooperate with that kind of behavior when local law enforcement can be held civilly liable for going along with that kind of nonsense? [1:24:50] And only federal ICE agents can hide from any civil consequences. [1:24:58] That's the predicament that we have. [1:25:00] And I would urge my colleagues to recognize those facts, and that law, when they start throwing around terms like sanctuary cities. [1:25:08] Sanctuary cities about my capital city. [1:25:13] Thank you, Senator. [1:25:16] Mr. Meares, I want to ask you, let's be clear about what we're talking about when we talk about sanctuary jurisdictions. [1:25:23] It's not holding anyone after. [1:25:25] It's about before they're being released, right? [1:25:29] That local officials would notify when a rapist or a murderer or a violent criminal is being released from prison. [1:25:39] Correct. [1:25:40] And so could you just talk about that sort of how that. [1:25:42] Yeah. [1:25:43] How that process in your experience worked. [1:25:47] And then also pointing out maybe in answering the question, why that is an infinitely safer process for people than ICE agents having to go into communities and find the same person, right? [1:25:59] No question. [1:26:00] Well, oftentimes when we use the term sanctuary cities, it's multilayered. [1:26:03] So we'll look at Fairfax County. [1:26:05] You have a local board of supervisors that pass something called the trust policy that explicitly prohibits their cooperation. [1:26:13] You have local officials cooperation with federal immigration authorities. [1:26:16] Then you have a local sheriff that also does not honor ICE detainers. [1:26:20] And then you have a local prosecutor in Steve Descano who publishes on his website, he takes in your immigration status into account in his charging decisions. [1:26:29] I've seen this firsthand because several years ago, I actually talked to ICE agents and asked them to walk through the process. [1:26:40] And I saw this with my own two eyes. [1:26:42] They decided, listen, you should see what we have. [1:26:43] Listen, you should see what we have to deal with. [1:26:45] All they have to do is make a phone call. [1:26:47] When the person is released, we literally meet them in the parking lot. [1:26:50] Because I asked them, the jurisdictions that cooperate, how does this work? [1:26:54] You have somebody that they're notified they're being released. [1:26:58] They get told when they're going to be released. [1:27:00] They meet them in the parking lot. [1:27:02] That is infinitely safer than when they're released in the community. [1:27:05] What I saw was ICE had to put together three different eight-man teams to arrest people that had previously been arrested. [1:27:13] One was on drug charges. [1:27:15] One was on a weapons charge. [1:27:16] One was a suspected MS-13 gang member that had been indicted on a rape charge. [1:27:22] And a left-wing judge in Fairfax County gave this person bond, even though this person was here illegally. [1:27:28] All three, they had to do an enormous amount of manpower to track down where they lived, determine a good time to apprehend them. [1:27:35] And what I saw was an early morning attempt for the suspected MS-13 gang member who had been indicted on a rape charge, [1:27:42] where he was leaving his townhouse late, and a school bus showed up with young children right there about to board the school bus. [1:27:53] He identified who the federal authorities were, and he started running through neighborhoods, through the streets. [1:28:00] They could not get cooperation from local law enforcement. [1:28:03] So that is infinitely more dangerous for the community. [1:28:06] What I saw than what was described to me the way it should work is picking this individual up, this MS-13 gang member up, [1:28:13] when he was released from jail. [1:28:14] Thank you. [1:28:15] Senator Padilla. [1:28:18] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:28:20] I want to thank all the witnesses for coming here today and for participating, particularly Mr. Abraham, for your loss. [1:28:30] Inexcusable, regardless of who the perpetrator was. [1:28:34] I can imagine how heartbreaking it is. [1:28:37] I just wanted you to know that we feel for you, and it takes a lot for you to be here to share your story. [1:28:42] But, Mr. Chairman. [1:28:45] Thank you. [1:28:46] Mr. Chairman, I know we've heard a lot, not just today, but for days and weeks and months, frankly years, [1:28:55] about the dangers and threats of sanctuary cities. [1:29:00] I think my colleagues that may not be as informed about sanctuary cities sometimes choose to describe a city or a state [1:29:12] as some sort of lawless wasteland where anything goes. [1:29:16] And that's either a misunderstanding, intentional or otherwise, of what sanctuary policies are. [1:29:24] And I think the American people deserve to know what sanctuary policies are and what they are not. [1:29:29] So sanctuary policies do not mean that there are no laws or that these communities are areas where anything goes. [1:29:36] It's not Mad Max. [1:29:39] In fact, as the National Immigration Law Center and others have found, there's a notable decrease in crime overall. [1:29:46] In cities and states that prioritize welcoming immigrant communities rather than targeting them. [1:29:54] These jurisdictions also report, by the way, higher median household income, less levels of poverty, and lower rates of unemployment. [1:30:02] I think these are all positive indicators for communities as a whole. [1:30:05] Not immune to an occasional tragedy, of course, but by and large, these are positive indicators. [1:30:11] And, Mr. Chair, I ask that I'm able to enter into the record studies with these findings [1:30:16] by researchers at the University of Texas Austin, University of Arizona, the University of North Carolina, [1:30:22] the American Immigration Council, the Center for American Progress, and the National Immigration Law Center. [1:30:28] Thank you very much. [1:30:30] So sanctuary policies, again, to be clear, also does not mean that the federal government doesn't have the ability to enter into that state or into those cities. [1:30:41] All sanctuary policies do is simply affirm that state and or local authorities [1:30:47] cannot be co-opted into performing immigration enforcement. [1:30:52] As Professor Vladek explained in his testimony, that's because immigration is a federal responsibility. [1:31:01] And enforcing it is the job of the federal government. [1:31:05] Now, I know some state and local jurisdictions choose to cooperate, but they can't be forced into it. [1:31:11] That's been upheld by the courts. [1:31:14] So while federal agencies continue to carry out immigration enforcement, [1:31:17] state and local law enforcement, [1:31:19] can choose to focus their time, their energy, and their finite resources [1:31:24] on providing for the needs, the safety, and well-being of the people living in their communities as they best determine. [1:31:32] So let me say that again. Sanctuary policies do not prevent ICE from going into any state or any city [1:31:40] to arrest someone who served time for a violent crime when they're being released from prison. [1:31:45] And the federal government is indeed notified of every single individual booking. [1:31:51] And that's not to say that ICE is going to let them go into a prison. [1:31:54] What we're not discussing today is this administration's failure to live up to their own claim [1:31:59] that they're arresting simply the worst of the worst. [1:32:02] Their own data tells us that the vast majority of the people that have been picked up by ICE and CBP [1:32:08] do not have a violent criminal history. [1:32:12] So I wish we were talking about that failure [1:32:15] instead of trying to distract from this administration's failures [1:32:18] by going down a sanctuary policy route. [1:32:22] Misperception rabbit hole. [1:32:24] My colleagues are free to disagree with these policies. [1:32:28] That's the nature of our work here in a democracy. [1:32:31] And I know that many of them fundamentally do. [1:32:34] But the disagreement doesn't make sanctuary policies unlawful. [1:32:39] And it clearly doesn't make our communities less safe based on the data that researchers have provided. [1:32:46] So I'd like to call out what this debate really is about. [1:32:51] It's not about public safety. [1:32:53] Because the evidence shows communities can be safe. [1:32:57] It's not about the law. [1:32:59] Because courts have upheld sanctuary policies time and again [1:33:03] all the way to the Supreme Court. [1:33:05] It's clearly about politics. [1:33:07] And scapegoating. [1:33:08] At a time when Americans are asking us to help make their lives better [1:33:11] and more affordable, by the way, [1:33:13] we should be focused on real solutions in that direction. [1:33:16] Not recycling the same tired, misleading talking points. [1:33:20] Sanctuary policies are constitutional. [1:33:23] They're practical. [1:33:24] And they allow local and state officials to do what they do best. [1:33:27] Focus their time, their energy, and finite resources [1:33:31] on providing for the safety of their communities as they best see fit. [1:33:36] So let's give the American people honesty. [1:33:38] Let's end the fear-mongering on these false narratives. [1:33:41] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [1:33:43] Senator Cruz. [1:33:44] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:33:46] Last week, 18-year-old college freshman Sheridan Gorman [1:33:55] went to the shores of Lake Michigan to look up at the sky [1:33:59] to catch a glimpse of the Northern Lights. [1:34:01] She went searching for light. [1:34:05] And instead, she was met with death. [1:34:09] As she walked with friends along Chicago's lakefront, [1:34:13] Sheridan was shot in the back by a masked coward dressed in black. [1:34:20] Her killer? [1:34:22] An illegal alien who entered the United States [1:34:25] and remained here to commit murder, [1:34:27] shielded by Chicago's failed sanctuary city policies. [1:34:35] Ms. Vaughn, is it correct that Sheridan's killer [1:34:39] had been picked up twice by law enforcement [1:34:42] but was released both times? [1:34:44] That is my understanding from the news accounts. [1:34:46] Is it also correct that he was picked up [1:34:49] by Joe Biden's border patrol in 2023 [1:34:52] but then released to roam freely within the United States? [1:34:55] Yes. [1:34:57] Is it also correct that Chicago police officers [1:35:00] arrested him for shoplifting at Macy's in 2023 [1:35:03] but then released him on the ridiculous assumption [1:35:06] that he would return for his court date? [1:35:08] Yes, according to reports. [1:35:11] Sheridan's killer has been hiding in Chicago, [1:35:15] a city that gleefully has become a sanctuary [1:35:20] for illegal aliens, criminal shoplifters, [1:35:24] and now cold-blooded murderers for nearly three years. [1:35:28] Just today, the mayor of Chicago debuted a garbage truck [1:35:33] with the large words in all caps ABOLISH ICE. [1:35:39] Ms. Vaughn, the sanctuary policies make American communities safer [1:35:45] or do they enable illegal alien criminals? [1:35:48] They only protect criminal aliens. [1:35:52] They do not make our city safer. [1:35:54] It is the fundamental duty of government to protect its citizens. [1:36:01] And yet this tragic scenario is repeating itself [1:36:05] in sanctuary jurisdictions again and again and again. [1:36:13] Mr. Abraham, thank you in particular for being here today. [1:36:16] Thank you. [1:36:17] I want to extend my deepest condolences. [1:36:20] I appreciate it. [1:36:21] I also appreciate Ranking Member Welsh and Mr. Padilla [1:36:24] for recognizing that. [1:36:26] What I don't understand is why my senator of Illinois, [1:36:29] Mr. Durbin, [1:36:31] said having heard two words from him toward me. [1:36:34] But sorry, I want to take your time. [1:36:36] Kind of amazing. [1:36:37] I think it is a fair question to ask. [1:36:39] Kind of happy he's calling it quits. [1:36:42] To the extent you feel comfortable sharing, [1:36:49] can you tell us about Katie? [1:36:52] Katie was great. [1:36:53] She had this amazing personality. [1:36:55] She was sharp as a tack. [1:36:57] Her wit was unbelievable. [1:36:59] She was going to be, wherever she was going to go, [1:37:02] was going to be amazing. [1:37:03] She had a great sense of reading rooms, [1:37:05] how to behave herself in those situations. [1:37:08] Ever since she was little, she was a terrific athlete. [1:37:11] Water polo, swam. [1:37:13] Had so many different friend groups. [1:37:16] Always was, you know, just an amazing support [1:37:21] for other friends and family. [1:37:23] So to me, this world in Illinois is a worse place now without her. [1:37:29] I'm the father of two teenage daughters. [1:37:31] Don't even think about that. [1:37:33] Don't even do it. [1:37:34] It's awful. [1:37:35] I can only imagine. [1:37:36] Don't even. [1:37:37] The pain and grief that you will suffer your entire life. [1:37:41] I'm in the grave with her. [1:37:42] It's amazingly, it's amazing. [1:37:47] I can't put it in words. [1:37:48] She was 20 years old when she was killed by an illegal alien drunk driver. [1:37:52] That's right. [1:37:53] You know, just this week, [1:37:58] there's a clip of Democrat Senator Chris Murphy on TV being interviewed. [1:38:06] And he says, the people that we care about most, [1:38:13] and he's speaking about Senate Democrats, [1:38:15] are illegal aliens. [1:38:19] You know, there's an old line that a gaffe [1:38:24] is when a politician tells the truth. [1:38:27] Mr. Abraham, how does it feel [1:38:30] listening to an elected representative say, [1:38:34] quite proudly, [1:38:35] that the people he cares most about, [1:38:38] and he was speaking for every Democrat senator, [1:38:40] he was saying the people we care most about [1:38:43] are illegal immigrants. [1:38:45] How does that feel? [1:38:46] Look, that's an indictment on him, I gotta say. [1:38:49] I'm not sure where citizens fit in all of this. [1:38:55] But at least my experience over the last 14 months [1:38:58] is we don't sit at the top. [1:39:01] We are not, our stories are inconvenient, [1:39:05] and therefore they're erased and ignored. [1:39:08] So does it surprise me? [1:39:09] No, it doesn't surprise me at all. [1:39:11] I was not, I should be, [1:39:13] but in today's world, that doesn't surprise me at all. [1:39:17] And really, just an unserious thing to say, [1:39:20] and I'm not sure why anyone in his state would pay attention to that. [1:39:25] Yeah. [1:39:26] The only thing I would respectfully disagree with [1:39:28] is the word unserious, [1:39:30] because I actually think he was deadly serious. [1:39:32] I think he was telling the truth. [1:39:34] And every Democrat had the chance to dispute it [1:39:39] at the State of the Union address, [1:39:41] when President Trump turned to the entire Democrat [1:39:43] and said, [1:39:44] stand if you agree with this, [1:39:47] that it is our duty to protect American citizens [1:39:50] and not illegal aliens. [1:39:51] And every Democrat, [1:39:55] every Democrat in the Senate, [1:39:56] every Democrat in the House, [1:39:57] sat stone-faced. [1:40:01] And they told the American people, [1:40:03] we agree with Chris Murphy. [1:40:05] The people we love the most are the illegal immigrants. [1:40:08] You know, the paper where Sheridan Gorman, [1:40:14] the school paper, [1:40:15] this week, [1:40:17] apologized to her murderer [1:40:21] because the first story correctly described him as an illegal immigrant. [1:40:27] What the hell is wrong with these people? [1:40:32] I'm sorry, Mr. Abraham. [1:40:33] Yeah, it's, they have, [1:40:36] they talk about compassion. [1:40:38] I haven't seen any yet. [1:40:39] So it's disgusting in a way. [1:40:43] I really, [1:40:44] we should not be left alone on an island [1:40:47] because we don't fit a certain ideology. [1:40:49] I am so sorry that certain folks [1:40:52] only live by their ideology, [1:40:54] their North Star, [1:40:55] and that is a bad life to live. [1:40:57] I think they're missing out on so many other things. [1:41:00] Meanwhile, my daughter's taken away. [1:41:02] I'll never see her again. [1:41:03] I haven't seen her, [1:41:04] heard her laugh, [1:41:05] hear her talk, [1:41:07] haven't grabbed her, [1:41:08] hold her, [1:41:09] 14 months now. [1:41:10] Do you, does, [1:41:11] does anyone consider that? [1:41:13] I mean, Sheriff, [1:41:14] do you even, [1:41:15] I mean, I can't believe what I'm hearing [1:41:16] on some of this stuff today. [1:41:18] But, you know, [1:41:19] I'm not some politician or bureaucrat. [1:41:22] I'm a, [1:41:23] I'm a dad who had his head down, [1:41:24] worked his tail off for his kids, [1:41:28] thinking foolishly he, [1:41:30] she was safe in some city. [1:41:32] I know Illinois is corrupt [1:41:34] and it's always been awful. [1:41:35] They always had guardrails. [1:41:36] The old school guys did. [1:41:38] And then I hear some of the stuff here. [1:41:40] I, I'm sorry. [1:41:42] I, I, [1:41:43] it's, it's, [1:41:44] it's awful. [1:41:45] You have nothing to apologize for. [1:41:48] And what happened to your daughter [1:41:49] never should have happened to her [1:41:50] and never should have happened to your family. [1:41:52] God bless you, sir. [1:41:53] It was preventable. [1:41:54] Yes. [1:41:55] I think what everyone's missing here [1:41:56] is that was preventable. [1:41:57] That did not have to happen. [1:41:59] He was identified. [1:42:01] They knew who he was. [1:42:02] He was pulled over by local police. [1:42:04] Bang up job on that one. [1:42:06] Let go to do this. [1:42:08] And now we're okay. [1:42:09] You know, [1:42:10] Governor Pritzker will say, [1:42:11] oh, look, [1:42:12] you got justice. [1:42:13] We found him. [1:42:14] If crime happens, [1:42:15] you're good to go. [1:42:16] We, we got him. [1:42:17] And he's in, [1:42:18] he's incarcerated now. [1:42:19] And my point there is [1:42:20] your daughter should still be alive. [1:42:21] My daughter's in a grave. [1:42:22] She'll never see the light of day. [1:42:23] Will he? [1:42:24] Yes. [1:42:25] But what did you do for him? [1:42:26] He did nothing for him. [1:42:27] You left them aimlessly in Illinois. [1:42:28] And now he'll sit in decades, [1:42:30] hopefully in jail. [1:42:31] They're the bang up job, [1:42:32] Illinois, [1:42:33] on that one. [1:42:34] That they're the people [1:42:35] that Democrats care the most about. [1:42:36] And I don't even care. [1:42:37] Same ideology for me. [1:42:38] It's so simple. [1:42:39] I don't care. [1:42:40] I don't care. [1:42:41] I don't care. [1:42:42] I don't care. [1:42:43] I don't care. [1:42:44] It's so simple. [1:42:46] That it's beyond my comprehension [1:42:47] why we sit here and deflect and deceive. [1:42:51] It's, [1:42:52] call it what it is. [1:42:53] I'm sorry. [1:42:54] Thank you, sir. [1:42:55] Senator Hirono. [1:42:59] Last year, [1:43:00] the Trump administration [1:43:01] started trying to condition federal grants, [1:43:04] whether cities and counties [1:43:06] support federal immigration enforcement. [1:43:08] This is a question for Professor Vladeck. [1:43:11] They tried conditioning [1:43:12] FEMA emergency preparedness funding. [1:43:15] They tried conditioning [1:43:16] federal immigration [1:43:17] Department of Transportation infrastructure funding. This regime has a [1:43:21] propensity to tie various kinds of funding to various ideological positions [1:43:27] that this regime takes. And by the way, the regime keeps losing in court. [1:43:32] Professor Valli, why does Trump keep losing in court and trying to withhold [1:43:37] funding for these other very important programs that our communities rely upon? [1:43:43] Well, Senator, I think the short answer is because as the Supreme Court has said [1:43:47] for decades, there are four different conditions that federal spending [1:43:51] conditions have to satisfy to be constitutional and the conditions that [1:43:54] the Trump administration has imposed have violated, Senator, somewhere between [1:43:58] two and three of them, depending upon which condition we're talking about. [1:44:03] Name one condition that they've violated. First of all, the conditions have to [1:44:08] be clearly expressed in law, an executive order that interprets a statute to allow [1:44:13] the president to impose a condition. [1:44:14] So, first of all the conditions have to be clearly expressed in law, an executive order that interprets a statute to allow the president to impose a condition. [1:44:14] condition is not clearly expressing that condition in law. The condition has to be substantially [1:44:19] related to the purpose of the funds, tying all the state's transportation funding to whether it [1:44:25] does or does not ban DEI practices is not related to transportation funding. And then the third [1:44:30] category is some of the grant cancellations and some of the spending cancellations are seemingly [1:44:35] First Amendment retaliation. So they run into the third problem. Everyone should understand that [1:44:40] executive orders, which is how this president wants to run the country, apparently, in addition [1:44:46] to taking us into an undeclared, therefore illegal war, is by executive order. That is not law. And [1:44:54] that is why there are over 500 lawsuits that have been filed by various entities, organizations, [1:45:00] states to prevent this regime from its continuing lawlessness. So let me go. In fact, the courts [1:45:08] require things like how about evidence? [1:45:10] Thank goodness the courts still require factual evidence to in order for the courts to go along [1:45:18] with this regime. Again, for Professor Vladecki, local law enforcement already have a lot of [1:45:27] important missions. They respond to mental health challenges, missing children, wildlife encounters, [1:45:33] they perform welfare checks, direct traffic, provide first aid, and conduct search and rescue. [1:45:41] They help the police. They help the police. They help the police. They help the police. They help the [1:45:42] public during natural and manmade disasters. And right now, Hawaii law enforcement officers are [1:45:48] helping our North Shore communities dig out from a massive flood. That is what local law enforcement [1:45:54] does. Of course, that is all in addition to preventing and responding to crime and ensuring [1:46:01] public safety. Professor Vladecki, local law enforcement, as I mentioned, does a lot of things. [1:46:08] For this, they require the trust of the community. [1:46:13] So, in your view, are they also required by either federal law or the Constitution [1:46:19] to enforce federal immigration law in order to everything that they already do on behalf [1:46:25] of the community? [1:46:26] So, they're not required to, Senator. And indeed, I'm not sure they can be compelled [1:46:29] to. But if I might briefly, I think that the relevant point is that different localities [1:46:34] are going to have different priorities. And those priorities are going to vary based upon [1:46:39] who the populace is, based upon what happens in that locality. The, you know, New York [1:46:43] City and a small town in Montana are not going to have the same law enforcement priorities. [1:46:49] And so, part of what this constitutional structure recognizes, for better or for worse, and I'm [1:46:53] not here to suggest that this is what I would have chosen if it were up to me, is that local [1:46:58] governments are in a better position to make those calls. They're more accountable to their [1:47:02] elected, to their populaces. And that the federal government doesn't have the power [1:47:07] to tell local governments what their policy choices ought to be. [1:47:11] This is for Sheriff Burke. Thank you. [1:47:13] Thank you. [1:47:14] I think that the accession with deportations isn't making America, Americans safer. In [1:47:19] fact, just look at what ISIS is doing in Minnesota, in Chicago, and other places. And it is terrorizing [1:47:27] communities and further eroding the relationship between immigrant communities and law enforcement. [1:47:34] Sheriff Burkard, what is the importance of trust with local law enforcement? As long [1:47:37] as we're talking about how important that is to enable local law enforcement to provide [1:47:42] public safety. [1:47:45] Madam Senator, it is critically important that we secure and maintain that level of [1:47:50] trust with our public. It's impossible for my deputies to do the job that we do, day in [1:47:55] and day out, as you already articulated. We do a number of things and we provide a number [1:48:01] of services to the community. But when that trust is broken, then we are unable to provide [1:48:08] services. We're unable to solve crimes as effectively as we would like to. And unfortunately, [1:48:15] we've seen play out over the past few months with ICE and CBP coming into our [1:48:21] communities it has eroded that trust and has dismantled our ability to be [1:48:27] successful in combating crime by the by the way that trust takes time to build [1:48:31] yes it does so mr. chairman I asked unanimous consent to enter into the [1:48:36] record a perspectives on politics article entitled quote how interior [1:48:41] immigration enforcement affects trust in law enforcement and quote which [1:48:46] finds a significant decrease in trust of local public and police ensures when [1:48:52] they support federal immigration enforcement thank you thank you that'll [1:48:59] conclude the hearing written questions for the record can be submitted until [1:49:02] Wednesday April 1st at 5 p.m. we asked the witnesses to submit their responses [1:49:07] within two weeks so by Wednesday April 15th at 5 p.m. I want to thank all the [1:49:11] witnesses for being here today [1:49:13] the hearing is adjourned we're gonna be on adjourn for a second the ranking [1:49:19] member has without objection thank you thank you we're adjourned